transpennine franchise

[387star]

When might we know if it will be extended (possibly a northern franchise tie in) or refranchised? Also what do people want to see from a new franchise and is northern rail amalgamation a good idea?

 

[Masbroughlad]

Give all of it or just Manchester Airport - Scotland to a refigured XC franchise (with Brum - East Anglia removed and Brum to Scotland via West Coast ML back to XC)

or

Split it between East Coast and West Coast - Give Manchester Airport to Blackpool/ Windermere / Scotland etc to West Coast franchise and give the rest to East Coast.

Certainly don't give it back to a Northern franchise! It needs to be kept with long distance, IC style services.

(As an aside, I'd also give EMT Liverpool - Anglia services to XC too).

Ideally, I'd probably redraw the franchises altogether - the old Big 4 with extended XC sat n top of them all.

 

[Aictos]

Only route I would move from Northern to Trans Pennine is the York to Blackpool North services other then that I wouldn't move anything.

 

[Masbroughlad]

Only route I would move from Northern to Trans Pennine is the York to Blackpool North services other then that I wouldn't move anything.

Yes, that would be a good idea too. Plus join the Nottingham - Leeds and Leeds - Carlisle services and stick them in too!

 

[sprinterguy]

I’d like to see the Manchester-Edinburgh/Glasgow services removed and incorporated into the new West Coast franchise. Other than that, I’d leave TPE as a stand alone franchise. It’s much better that attention is focused solely on Transpennine rather than it being a component part of a larger franchise with other issues to concern itself about. TPE as it is works very well and can offer more of an Intercity style service than if it was incorporated into a local train operator.

 

[WatcherZero]

A couple of years ago they were talking about breaking up TPE and divvying it up between Northern, XC and Virgin, mind you they were talking about amalgrating smaller franchises and reducing the total numbers, dont know if that policy has changed.

Ive looked but cant find the passenger numbers/mileage per franchise, but if I remember TPE annual was around 1bn passenger km and they were looking at the time for the smallest franchise to be around 1.5bn?.

 

[Nym]

TPE should be kept seperate from NT, but shouldn't have the LDPE WC Services to Scotland From MIA. They should be in the hands of ICWC, with all the tilting stock (and enoough LDPE EMUs with EPS to run all the services).

MIA - TP North West should be kept with TPE, with possible addition of the MIA - Liverpool services, and TP North kept as is, it works well as it's own franchise and should be kept as such. If it was just an express service ran by northern, then it would be less attactive to passengers than the good image for MDPE services that TPE has, reducing rail's Modal share on the TP Route, but they should also keep all of their stock when the NW electrification is completed, and have unpowered centre cars for the 185s, with proper SDO for short platforms, and extentions to 8 car platforms on the north west route (Manc - Preston via Bolton & Chorley) to intergrate with 319s coming to play, so that the MIA - BPN can be 8 car leccy refurbed 2+2 (4car+4car) as can the Barrow / Windermere services up till Lancaster or Preston where it can either drop off some coaches, or split to serve both with one path into Manchester, with the other either terminating at Lancaster, or having hourly through services to both Barrow and Windermere (would be nice), a small amount of track at Carnforth might enable services to split there.

 

[Philip]

TPE should be kept seperate from NT, but shouldn't have the LDPE WC Services to Scotland From MIA. They should be in the hands of ICWC, with all the tilting stock (and enoough LDPE EMUs with EPS to run all the services).

MIA - TP North West should be kept with TPE, with possible addition of the MIA - Liverpool services, and TP North kept as is, it works well as it's own franchise and should be kept as such. If it was just an express service ran by northern, then it would be less attactive to passengers than the good image for MDPE services that TPE has, reducing rail's Modal share on the TP Route, but they should also keep all of their stock when the NW electrification is completed, and have unpowered centre cars for the 185s, with proper SDO for short platforms, and extentions to 8 car platforms on the north west route (Manc - Preston via Bolton & Chorley) to intergrate with 319s coming to play, so that the MIA - BPN can be 8 car leccy refurbed 2+2 (4car+4car) as can the Barrow / Windermere services up till Lancaster or Preston where it can either drop off some coaches, or split to serve both with one path into Manchester, with the other either terminating at Lancaster, or having hourly through services to both Barrow and Windermere (would be nice), a small amount of track at Carnforth might enable services to split there.

Or put it back to how it was until the end of 2007 - Virgin Voyager to Scotland on a 2-hourly service starting from Manchester Pic at xx:58 , then an hourly TPE service to Lancaster alternating between Barrow and Windermere, as well as the hourly Blackpool fast service. Also restore the Salford Crescent stop on the Lancaster bound services, too much pressure on just 3 TPH between Salford and Piccadilly.

Would have been ideal to have say 185s working the Blackpools, 3 car 175s on the Barrow/Windermere service with some 2 car 175s used for the quieter ones and for strengthening, in addition to a 4/5 car Voyager for Glasgow and Edinburgh. I think we had something like that for a few days in December 2006 inbetween putting the 185s on TPE NW and handing back all the 175s to ATW.

 

[Nym]

I would be handing back the manc - scot services to VT, extended to airport path permitting but increased to hourly alternating between edinbrugh and glasgow, to create a standard hourly pattern (4tph Vic - Salford Cres, 4tph Pic - Salford Cres and 1tph fast from pic through salford every hour, (The VT))

 

[387star]

I think what is clear is the general consensus would be the 185s are not suitable for Manchester-Scotland not having been designed for such routes and always a tempoary option pending electrification. This will have to happen to boost TPEs fleet for there is no other mention of boosting capacity.

Unless they work on the interiors *shock horror* for the seating is table generous. I believe the cost of more 185s is too high/fuel issues? Where are the TPE 170s maintained? Perhaps more 172s (which are similar and lighter) should be sought for even with cascade of units this will not be enough. Same goes for CrossCountry which will have to find a solution for unsuitable units or price people off

 

[MCR247]

I believe the cost of more 185s is too high/fuel issues? Where are the TPE 170s maintained?

Either way what would you do with 185s? They are fine where they are.

170s are maintained at Ardwick

 

[43167]

Either way what would you do with 185s? They are fine where they are.

170s are maintained at Ardwick

Actually, the 170's are maintained at Crofton.

 

[MCR247]

Sorry, my mistake